Thanks to Gen X, there are a lot of misconceptions about young voters.

If you're in your twenties, you've undoubtedly heard the mantra, "But young people don't vote" from strategists and pundits. Those of us under 30 know that this isn't true, but anecdotal stories from our own trips to the polls aren't that helpful.

Rock the Vote, which recently teamed up with Young Voter Strategies, released a helpful fact sheet on the voting trends of those under 29.

This is particularly relevant to Republicans since many of the tight elections in 2006 were won by Democrats, who ran young voter outreach programs. According to Rock the Vote:

• Montana: Tester defeated Burns by 3,562 votes; 18-29 turnout was up by 39,106 votes over 2002.
• Virginia: Webb defeated Allen by 9,329 votes; 18-29 turnout was up by 110,453 votes over 2002.
• Missouri: McCaskill defeated Talent by 48,314 votes, 18-29 turnout was up by 108,269 votes.
• CT-02: Joe Courtney won by 83 votes; turnout at the UConn polling place was up nearly 10x that.

A new generation is now voting, and they're very different from Boomers and Xers. They're willing to vote and work, especially in tight elections. However, Millennials need to be asked and invited. We're the generation that grew up with targeted marketing. Shouldn't politics be targeted towards us as well?

Red State is calling for Republican presidential candidates and Republican viewers to boycott CNN until Sam Feist, their political director and David Bohrman, Senior Vice President and Executive Producer of the debate are fired.

Their demands:

1) Republican candidates for President should boycott CNN.

2) Republican viewers should boycott CNN until they fire Sam Feist, their political director; and David Bohrman, Senior Vice President and Executive Producer of the debate.

3) One or more of the Republican candidates should demand a do over wherein we can have a substantive debate about substantive issues that exclude CNN's agenda, which is clearly out of touch with the Republican party, and the drivel we saw from YouTube.

Good for RedState to harness the outrage of the conservative blogosphere and issue a call for action. This is either extremely sloppy journalism or another example of liberal bias in the media. Either way, it's not acceptable.

Raise your hand if you've ever attended a grassroots or advocacy training session, and e-mail was the most sophisticated strategy mentioned.

A few weeks ago, I attended such a session. Nothing was mentioned about using the web to support candidates or advocate a cause. When the floor was open to suggestions, I encouraged those in the room to go home and get involved with local blogs. As soon as the session ended, I was barraged by questions on how individuals could use the web for their cause in their communities.

This was a group of highly motivated volunteers willing to devote a weekday to advocacy training. It's sad to think of the opportunities that the organization missed by neglecting basic training on the web. If a DC-based organization with access to knowledgeable professionals failed to cover the web, how much worse is it in the rest of the country? If conservatives aren't engaged online, it's not because they lack an interest.

Thanks to the media's love/hate relationship with social media, most people have heard about blogs or social networks. But Mr. and Mrs. Middle America are too busy to figure it all. We need to show them how to use these tools to make an impact in their community. There's momentum at the top of the movement, but is it filtering down to the grassroots?

(More after the jump)

Have an idea for a panel at the Politics Online Conference 2008? You have a few more days to suggest a concept at IPDI's web site. If your idea is chosen, you get a free ticket, which is valued at $495.

This is the last week to turn your ideas into a reality by nominating a panel for the Politics Online Conference. Panel nominations close this Friday, November 2 at 5 p.m.

In 2008, the Politics Online Conference (March 4 & 5) will feature 7 breakout session panels created and voted on by the politics and technology community. Panel concepts will be accepted on our website here, and all panel concepts will be posted on the Politics Online Conference website.

Panel nominees will be voted on by the public at http://polc.ipdi.org during the month of November. If your panel is selected, then you will be invited to chair the panel. We'll also give you a free premium ticket the conference and cut you a deal on tickets for the rest of your office.

See you March 4th!

Last night, Unity08 sent an alert explaining the differences between Facebook, YouTube, Flickr and Myspace and descriping the concept of social networking.

The power of social networking is quite amazing. In a very short amount of time, you can be virtually connected with millions of people. At Unity08, we use our social network profiles to help us connect with others that are interested in learning more about us.

Please take 10 minutes this week to check out (and/or join) our social networks!

If you are already part of the social networks below, then make sure you add us as a "friend" or that you subscribe to our channel. If you are not on the networks below, please consider joining or subscribing.

YouTube allows you to upload, view and share video clips.
Subscribe to our video channel now!

Flickr is a photo sharing web site.
Join our flickr group now!

Facebook: Join or sign in, then search for "Unity08" to find our application.
Click here to join or sign in to Facebook!

MySpace is an interactive network of friends.
Click here to add Unity08 as a friend on MySpace!

How does this help us? By joining a social network and adding us as a friend or subscribing to a group or channel, you help us to be seen by more people. Joining our network makes it easy for you to meet other Unity08 members and to pass along our profile to your friends!

We'll see you online!

At first I thought that the alert was a waste of time. Why do users need to be educated about social networks? Aren't we already on them? Then Facebook statistics came to mind.

Social networking isn't for kids anymore. According to Facebook, by the end of 2007, Facebook will be up to 60 million users, and 75% will be out of college. With 65% of people 50-64 going online, and 32% of the 65+ crowd venturing onto the web, it's worth recruiting them. The adoption curve is moving toward older audiences, and we need to change perceptions that web stuff is for crazy college students.

Today, IPDI released Poli-fluentials: The New Political Kingmakers, which builds on their Political Influentials Online in the 2004 Presidential Campaign report.

RoperASW's Influentials took politics, especially Republicans, by storm. This study examines those Influentials who are highly involved in politics.

Based on an e-mail survey completed by 10,000 people this summer, Poli-fluentials dug into the nuances of online political junkies (chances are if TechRepublican is on your reader, you fall into this category). This wasn't a random survey, so findings are specific to population. However, if you're running a campaign or promoting or work for an advocacy group, you want to attract Poli-fluentials.

The report helps answer the question that plagues all of us here--are Republicans behind on the web? Now we have some evidence that there's work cut out for us. Poli-fluentials are, "more likely to be Democrats than Republicans (46% vs. 30%). Similarly, more Poli-fluentials were liberal or very liberal (45%) than were conservative or very conservative (33%)."

Another interesting finding revealed that social networking worked best for progressive or social conservative issues. People need to have internalized and have a personal stake in the issue for it to be successful. Business or private issues that don't engage people on an emotional level aren't the juicy topics that socnets attract.

These two facts alone, show that Republicans can make the most impact by appealing to our base. It's acknowledged that the right has far bigger offline networks to tap. It's time to get those groups online. We've touched on the need to get pro-life groups more active on the web before, and these numbers just show us where the holes in the rightroots are.

Poli-fluentials also overwhelmingly volunteer:

Our research indicates that volunteers to political campaigns come almost exclusively from the ranks of Poli-fluentials. Our study finds that people who make contributions but who do not actively promote candidates and causes are much less likely to volunteer--only 12% of them did. Similarly, among the people who publically promote candidates and causes, only 10% volunteer. Candidates and causes in search of foot soldiers to perform actual work of campaigns would do well to cultivate Poli-fluentials.

Bottom line: You want these people. Not only do they donate, but they're also eager footsoldiers.

There's a lot more in this study that I'm still weeding through. If you're willing to spend $25 to order it, it's worth the investment.

A few months ago, Morra Aarons at techPresident and Blogher started a discussion about women and political blogging. At first I rolled my eyes and cited a few statistics from Pew and IPDI about men and women using the web for the same activities at equal rates. Then the NYT Caucus Blog delved into the topic a bit more. Earlier this week, I took a more irreverent stab at it, but some of the comments at the NYT have a point.

Men and women are using the Internet at the same rate for gathering news, sharing videos, checking e-mail and blogging. We know what people are doing online, but do we know why?

There's a perception problem that far more men are engaged in online politics. Sairy at Blogher does a rundown of leading women, but note that most are grouped together at sites like Blogher or specific policy issues. Women are engaged online, but in different places than political blogs. They're hanging out at mommyblogs, feminist websites, cancer support groups and craft forums. While the focus of these blogs and forums may not be political, their insights and topics reflect what women encounter in their daily lives, and politics play a major role. They care less about the horserace and more about the big-picture issues.

What does this mean for campaigns? We've understood this in the media for a long time. There's a reason why candidates and their spouses share cookie recipes, tour the country talking about education and fight for the covers of women's magazines. Female voters respond to these efforts, yet web communication is still one-size-fits-all.

Elizabeth Edwards gained the favor of Democratic women a long time ago with her involvement on the web. She and Hillary took in rave reviews for stopping by the Blogher conference while everyone else failed to have a presence. What about Republicans? Yesterday, the Romney campaign launched AnnRomney.com and is on the right track. There's also Jerigirls.com, started by female Thompson supporters and devoted to all things Jeri Thompson. Does it take a female web director, like Mindy Finn at the Romney campaign, or a dedicated female supporters to reach women on the web?

Blogger outreach and community building are more important than ever. Women aren't going to pick up on the blow-by-blow updates that political blogs cover, yet they will discuss them when it relates to the issues that they care about. They enjoy policy discussions when there's a human interest angle. They don't want soft news, but more interesting packages of news that are deserve our valuable time. If you're still confused, realize that Madison Avenue has spent the past 100 years and billions of dollars trying to grasp how women think.

I can't emphasize the impact of community enough. Mommyblogging started when moms connected with each other through their blogs. Free Republic has recipe threads, and iVillage hosts thousands of message boards. We think about the web in flat, equal terms with every blog or web site connected through a series of social networks or blogrolls. In reality, especially with women, the web is a group of clusters ranging from Blogher to neighborhood listserves like Capitol Hill Mommies. Finding these clusters and understanding how your candidate and his or her issues fit into them can make the difference.

We do this with outreach. Why did Hillary speak at a hairdresser convention? She went where her supporters where. It's time to mimic this on the web.

With the most basic software, it's possible to target the female vote, but it takes time, staff resources, a bit of creativity and the willingness to try to understand women.

UPDATE: Verizon has reversed their decision and will allow NARAL to carry out their campaign.

Thanks to NARAL, we now know that texting isn't considered free speech. While I'm not sad to see a pro-choice group take a few knocks, this has repercussions for everyone.

The US is far behind Europe with our cell phone technology, so SMS or texting has yet to make the impact that it has across the pond. As more political parties and advocacy groups use newer communication technologies to carry controversial messages, we're reminded how much our laws need to catch up with technology.

The Times article points out that texting falls under the Net Neutrality debate that was highlighted here a few weeks ago with the conservative argument for and against it. Yet this Verizon decision takes the issue from a blogosphere debate to a real problem that campaigns face. What happens when you create a great texting plan and one of the largest US carriers refuses to accept it?

Do Republicans support First Amendment protection expanding to all technologies or do they fight government intrusion and hope that competition counters these types of policies?

[Cross posted at Girl from the South]

While reading over old posts, I noticed that much of the time we're repeating similar themes or points. Since many of us are evangelists, here are some topics that frequently come up.

1. The web will never replace traditional campaigns. It shouldn’t take over other functions. The web works best when it facilitates and enhances a campaign’s ability to reach voters.

2. Small donors matter. Remember the long tail.

3. Young people vote. Eliminate the expression, “Youth don’t vote” from your vocabulary and realize that the best place to reach them is the web.

4. It takes more than writing a blog or starting a Facebook group to build an online community.

5. The web is about creating a conversation or dialog not issuing marching orders.

6. There isn’t one formula for creating a successful web campaign. Each campaign or organization needs to find the right mix based on its goals and research.

7. The web doesn’t cost much, but it does require an investment of staff or volunteer time.

8. Transparency is crucial.

9. Remember to reach out to bloggers. Blogger relations are just as important as media relations.

10. Modern media shouldn’t be done in a vacuum. Integrate the web with other departments.

Anyone notice any other points that are worth repeating?

Edelman and PR Week just released, The Next Generation of Communicators, a report from the New Media Academic Summit 2007.

While it sounds like a lofty academic paper filled with jargon, this is report offers a practical picture of the current state of communications and where the field is going. It does a good job of bringing bloggers, journalists, professors, and CEOs together for an interesting discussion.

H/T SixtySecondView